Exorcismo

I remember seeing the trailer for this movie and thinking it was some sort of sequel to The Pope's Exorcist, but its not. Its not related at all and yet it feels like the same movie. Odd!

Not sure what's going on with Russell Crowe's career. I know that some stars get older and phase out, forced to do lower value movies or take supporting roles over leads in bigger ones but what was the crime to Hollywood Russell Crowe committed to have to do such bad movies other than him getting fat?

(What? Don't act like that's not a crime in Hollywood?) From my perspective the movie is filled with well enough known names: Adam Goldberg Chole Bailey. David Hyde Pierce is in this movie! David High Pierce! I known it's been a while sense Fraser has been on the air but I feel like Miles Crane must give the movie some star power. And Sam Worthington! This was a real puzzle. Did Worthington owe someone money? Does the filmmaker have something on this dude that would get him canceled?

I can only imagine what this movie was suppose to be is sitting somewhere on a cutting room floor in Hollywood cause this is not making sense. It's amazing how someone could have watched this movie and thought this was going to fly and I can only assume what Crowe signed up for and filmed was totally different than the finished product.

I can clearly see a good idea that just was not done well at all.

I know that this film was technically being worked on before the serviceable pope's exorcist last year, but I find it funny that Crowe took both nearly exact roles as an exorcist in a 4 year span. This is a guy that won an Oscar that was once held as a top five actor in the 2000s. That's not to say he still can't act well because in both of these films, he carries it with his tenacious intensity and dedication to the character. It just seems peculiar that he's not in really any other films.

While, this film doesn't do anything particularly different and the cliches run amok . It's still a passable exorcism movie with captivating enough visuals and ok story to keep you intertwined. The supporting cast is actually rather great as well. Sam Worthington proves once again he's quite underrated and never truly got the respect he deserved. Crowe of course pours every bit he has into these films and while I'd like to see him get other roles if that's even possible, he has found a particular niche As the go to aging exorcist.

Giving this an 6/10 rating

Gets above 5 because Russell Crowe is good, as is David Hyde Pierce, Chloe Bailey is great, Adam Goldberg plays quite the unlikeable man in this, and it's really the performances that are good, the film is not enough, and at least it does have some good horror in it, as in a few good deaths, effects are good, it uses light, very well.

The set up is fine, the film is played out into day sessions, and Crowe's character goes deeper into the hell hole. It's not really that scary, but again, you have good acting but nothing really else that helps you feel that this is been done before, More needed on the characters and story please, think this might of been a rush job to get this one out, it's a disappointing film, not worth the trip unless you watch the trailer and it suits you.

The other big problem is that he played this character that is so similar in 'The Pope's Exorcist', a few months back, and a sequel is coming for that, go watch that instead of this. Like I wrote above, some good acting is why I gave it a 6 instead of a 5.

Anthony Miller (Russell Crowe) gets hired on a movie project which resembles The Exorcist (1973). He's trying to reconnect with his estranged daughter Lee Miller (Ryan Simpkins) and both are still dealing with her mother's death. In addition, Anthony has other past issues which may be resurfacing.

This project probably started with an interesting meta idea. The movie is rather muddled in the beginning, but it is mostly tired. If there is one word to describe this, it is tired. The characters are all tired. The actors are tired. The story feels tired even with its meta covering. This is dark and gloomy and tired.

If you're planning to watch a horror film, this is definitely not the one to choose. The production seems to have mistakenly categorized it under the horror genre instead of drama. Out of the 100-minute runtime, the film dedicates a mere 15 minutes to horror, while the remaining 85 minutes are purely drama. Watching this in theaters feels like a waste of time and money if you're expecting a spine-chilling horror experience. Given the minimal horror content, the price of this movie should be Rs 15, reflecting the 15 minutes that are worth watching.

The acting is commendable, but this only holds true if you approach the movie as a drama. The performances are solid and engaging in the context of a dramatic narrative, but if you're hoping for terrifying scenes and suspenseful moments, you'll be sorely disappointed. The film is painfully slow for a horror movie, lacking the tension and thrills that are characteristic of the genre.

One of the most significant drawbacks is its lack of relevance to the previous movie in the series. Fans who are looking for continuity and connections to the earlier installment will find none. This disconnection makes the movie feel disjointed and leaves viewers questioning its place in the series. It's almost as if the filmmakers decided to create a standalone drama but then labeled it as part of the horror series to attract a larger audience.

The storyline itself is unremarkable and fails to evoke any real fear or suspense. The plot meanders through various dramatic elements, focusing on character development and interpersonal relationships. While these aspects might be interesting in a different genre, they simply don't work in a movie that is supposed to be horror. The 15 minutes of horror that the film does offer are clichéd and predictable, lacking the originality and creativity needed to make a lasting impact.

Moreover, the pacing is incredibly slow, dragging through scenes that add little to the overall narrative. This slow pacing is a significant detriment in a horror film, where timing and rhythm are crucial to building tension and maintaining the audience's engagement. Instead of feeling on the edge of their seats, viewers are likely to find themselves bored and restless, waiting for something, anything, to happen.

The film's setting and atmosphere also fail to contribute to a sense of fear or unease. The locations and cinematography are more suited to a drama, with warm lighting and intimate settings that don't lend themselves to creating a spooky or ominous mood. The music, too, is more melodramatic than menacing, further reinforcing the feeling that you're watching a drama rather than a horror film.

If you have no plans and nowhere else to go, and maybe if you have some time to waste, then perhaps you might consider watching it. But even in that case, it would be with the understanding that you're not going to experience a traditional horror film. For those who value their time and are looking for a genuine horror experience, it's best to spend your valuable time elsewhere. There are plenty of other films that deliver true horror and are worth watching.

In conclusion, this film is a disappointment for horror enthusiasts. Its misclassification, slow pace, and lack of relevance to its predecessor make it a poor choice for a horror movie night. The drama elements might be appreciated by some, but they don't belong in a film marketed as horror. Save your time and money for a film that truly delivers on its promise of thrills and scares. This one, unfortunately, does not.